C/O Gayatri Malhotra, Unsplash
Roe v. Wade should be an eyeopener for Canadians on its issues surrounding abortion access
In 1973, Roe v. Wade became a landmark case for reproductive rights as the United States Supreme Court affirmed the right to abortion. On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, making abortion illegal or highly restricted in twenty states as of July 9, 2022, with others slowly following.
But this is all happening in the United States, not in Canada. So why should we care? As we are known for our amazing healthcare, it’s not an issue for us, right?
But this is all happening in the United States, not in Canada. So why should we care? As we are known for our amazing healthcare, it’s not an issue for us, right?
Being Canadian, I am beyond grateful for the ease I have had in terms of healthcare and knowing certain accommodations and procedures will always be available for me, but not every Canadian can say the same.
For instance, individuals living in provinces and territories such as Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories and Yukon, face many issues when it comes to receiving abortions. These regions often only have one abortion provider, usually found in urban areas. Moreover, these provinces and territories only have a gestational limit of 12 to 16 weeks, whereas here in Ontario the limit is around 23 to 24 weeks.
This lack of accessibility only makes it so much more difficult for individuals to go and receive abortions due to both location as there are so few providers and the shorter gestational limit.
This lack of accessibility only makes it so much more difficult for individuals to go and receive abortions due to both location as there are so few providers and the shorter gestational limit.
Additionally, abortions are not only used when one wishes to terminate a pregnancy. They are the procedure when an individual has a miscarriage or is in a condition where the baby cannot survive and will only cause harm and danger to the mother's body. Meaning as ironic as the concept of abortions may be to some, they do also save lives.
It has also been well established that restricting abortion access impacts marginalized populations heavily. According to Statistics Canada, in 2016 38 per cent of Inuit women and one in four off-reserve Indigenous and Métis women cited the most common reason for dropping out of school was pregnancy. In a study on young pregnancies in Nunavut, researchers found that Inuit women generally, have their first child at an early age and have more children than other non-Indigenous women.
Given the state the ongoing effects of COVID-19 has left our economy and society in, our government not solving current challenge and causing even more challenges for marginalized communities is more than reason enough for why we should care about what's happening here.
With the lack of funding, access, care and the history our country has over controlling certain communities, it becomes immensely difficult. This law change affects individuals economically, it will increase poverty rates, kill mothers and leave families grieving and disproportionately affect marginalized communities.
Currently in Canada inter-provincial abortions are restricted to those who can afford to travel, have the money and the available necessities. With all of the major changes happening around abortion laws and rights in the States, it should make you open your eyes to what is happening here, especially with the preconceived notion that Canada’s abortion laws are perfect. It is important we continue to do our research, never stay quiet and support our peers, even as we still have improvements to make ourselves.
With all of the major changes happening around abortion laws and rights in the States, it should make you open your eyes to what is happening here, especially with the preconceived notion that Canada’s abortion laws are perfect.
Expand upon your post-secondary studies to discover your pathway to an exciting career in health information. Learn and apply industry standards for the collection, use, and analysis of personal health data. Study information management’s principles and practices for privacy, confidentiality and security, and how these are applicable to health information systems. Learn how electronic information management is revolutionizing health care within service sectors: primary care, administration and research.
As the Canadian health care delivery system evolves, so does data collection, health information usage and analysis, privacy and security, and the integration of information systems.
That’s why McMaster University Continuing Education is thrilled to announce that its Health Information Management Plus Diploma program is now accredited by the Canadian College of Health Information Management (CCHIM). This accreditation means that the program has met the strict regulation requirements upheld by both the certifying body and the Canadian Health Information Management Association (CHIMA), the national association representing leadership and excellence in health information management across the country.
This post-graduate, part-time, instructor-led program is an online learning experience designed by leading experts in the country in consultation with professional associations. Graduates of the program are eligible to become Certified Health Information Management (CHIM) professionals, who are in high demand in a variety of health care settings across the continuum of care and within provincial and federal governments. These professionals will use electronic information management to revolutionize health care.
The CHIM credential is recognized across Canada, and our members play key roles in the Canadian health system, including privacy and information analytics, to decision support and the coding and classification of records.
McMaster University Continuing Education provides its learners with academic programs that are well-designed, accessible, and relevant to the professional field. Programs within health information are designed for learners with an undergraduate degree or college diploma seeking to build upon their prior knowledge and skills.
To qualify for the Health Information Management Plus Diploma (45 units), students must complete all required courses for the program. In agreement with CHALearning, McMaster University Continuing Education students will register and complete 3 coding courses offered by CHALearning. Upon successful completion of the 3 courses, students receive 6 units of study to be applied to the HIM Plus Diploma. All program courses are offered online. This diploma program is accredited by the Canadian College of Health Information Management (2018-2020).
Applications for the winter term cohort open on January 2, 2019. To find out more about admission requirements, please visit mcmastercce.ca/health-information-management or contact us at mcmastercce.ca/contact-us.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
Last week, the majority of students who casted ballots voted against adopting any of the potential MSU healthcare plan add-ons. The failure of all three referendum options is incredibly disappointing and disheartening. The add-ons were, in short, an incredible deal for students. For very low prices (a total of 77 dollars), they would cover most of the costs of vision care, prescription contraception and a variety of other medical services.
The last two add-ons could have been viewed by some students as “controversial,” however I find it hard to believe that the average student voter does not understand the impact of vision coverage on someone’s health, performance, and success.
This tells me that this was a decision made by an uninformed student vote. I think, in this case, the combination of lack of communication from the MSU, voter apathy, and some other factors are to blame. Of course, there is only so much the MSU can do to engage students if they are not willing to participate in the exchange of information. But there were several shortcomings of the MSU in this process that have to be discussed.
Although it is not the responsibility of the MSU to actively campaign for a side of a referendum, it is the job of the MSU to accurately communicate important information to students. David Campbell told the Silhouette last week that “doing more to communicate what we do” is one of the MSU President’s main priorities throughout the year. I will not deny that the MSU effectively reached out to students about the existence of referendum questions on the presidential ballot, however it did not communicate to students the substance of these questions. The weeks before the election period saw various instances of poorly and often inaccurately communicated information.
Additionally, the proposed HSR questions were often presented in a positive light, covered in at least two stories by the Silhouette, and shared with enthusiasm on an HSR referendum video posted on the MSU's website. The health care video that was posted, on the other hand, used neutral language and expressions.
The issue wasn’t solely the MSU’s lack of communication. Even an engaged student willing to learn more about the referendum questions would have hit a brick wall upon arriving on the MSU website’s referendum page. The information provided in the section is limited to the questions that were going to be included in the ballot. In the case of the HSR referendum, the proposed changes were self-explanatory, but the same was not the case for the health care questions. In addition to using the terms “oral” and “prescription” contraceptives interchangeably, information was lacking on the third option. The extent of the coverage offered was not adequately explained and some of the wording was ambiguous. Documents outlining the potential plans in detail and the implications of their implementation didn’t exist, and even the explanations for the plans in the existing questions appeared incomplete.
There is a difference between promoting one side of the referendum and providing the student body with substantial information on the issue. Much more could have been done to inform the students. Providing us with health plan comparisons, explanations, and engaging graphics are just a few possibilities.
Another source of confusion could have been the students’ ability to opt-out of the plan if these options were passed. As it currently states on the MSU website, students can only opt-out if they have “comparable” coverage. Once again, the wording is vague, leads to misinformation, and no explanation of how the implementation of the add-on would affect students’ ability to opt-out was provided.
As I mentioned earlier, I don’t think the MSU alone is to blame for the failure of the health care referendum. Despite having the highest voter turnout so far, we’re still at only 40.5% of the student membership population.
It is very likely that many students did not think beyond their own health care insurance when answering the question. A student covered under their family’s insurance, could have seen the add-ons as entirely useless to their own well-being.
Seeing as the majority of the students were motivated to cast of ballot so they could vote for a presidential candidate, it’s also important to examine how the candidates talked about the health care referendum.
Several candidates said that they supported most or all of the add-ons, while a few held that students could make their own decisions. None of the candidates promoted or discussed the health care referendum as much as they could have. I think the lack of promotion from the candidates is also partially responsible for the outcome of this year’s referendum. Yes, the students can make their own decision, but that’s assuming that the students are informed.
The MSU could have done much more to promote this referendum and educate students. The candidates, too, should have taken more proactive roles.
This plan could have been a great opportunity for low-income students and those without coverage.
Many students are disappointed with the outcome, and rather than denying them the option to make an educated decision, I think the MSU should consider bringing the questions to the SRA and the student body for a vote again.
